publishing industry – TeleRead News: E-books, publishing, tech and beyondhttp://teleread.com
For lovers of books and gadgets. Est. 1995.Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:20:09 +0000enhourly198011808New U.S. overtime rules threaten Big Publishing junior labor practiceshttp://teleread.com/new-u-s-overtime-rules-threaten-big-publishing-hierarchydeference-culture/
http://teleread.com/new-u-s-overtime-rules-threaten-big-publishing-hierarchydeference-culture/#commentsTue, 31 May 2016 09:40:30 +0000http://teleread.com/?p=163087For all those of you who didn’t already know that New York publishing houses and Big Publishing in general function like a knockoff script from a Whit Stillman movie, here’s fresh proof from the New York Times. Apparently, publishing houses are first in line among businesses likely to be hit by fresh U.S. government rulings that they pay their junior staff decent overtime rates. The Obama administration’s Labor Department regulation basically doubles the minimum salary level for staff to be paid time-and-a-half overtime rates for pulling more than a 40-hour working week, kicking in from December 1st. A great many more low-to-medium-wage earners could now be swept up in the

]]>For all those of you who didn’t already know that New York publishing houses and Big Publishing in general function like a knockoff script from a Whit Stillman movie, here’s fresh proof from the New York Times. Apparently, publishing houses are first in line among businesses likely to be hit by fresh U.S. government rulings that they pay their junior staff decent overtime rates.

The Obama administration’s Labor Department regulation basically doubles the minimum salary level for staff to be paid time-and-a-half overtime rates for pulling more than a 40-hour working week, kicking in from December 1st. A great many more low-to-medium-wage earners could now be swept up in the overtime net. This could threaten what the NYT describes, delightfully, as the Devil Wears Prada economy of pitifully overworked and ridiculously underpaid assistants and juniors in publishing and magazine houses. The NYT cites Dan Reynolds, CEO of Workman Publishing, on how to get ahead in Noo Yawk publishing: “You want to bump into the boss at 8 o’clock at night.”

It also quotes that lovely character Andrew Wylie saying he wouldn’t consider paying staff overtime if they worked long hours by choice. “What am I supposed to do, sit at the door with a stopwatch? … I’m not going to do that.” An anonymous former Wylie employee, speaking anonymously to the NYT “because of fear of reprisals,” said that Wylie assistants often worked 50-60 hours a week without overtime pay. And for anyone in publishing who has to manage interns, there’s a useful link here – though it could start off with: pay them reasonably…

None of this will come as a surprise in British Big Publishing, already condemned as “disgusting” and “immoral” for refusing to pay staff the official UK Living Wage. The only reasonable conclusion is that Big Publishing doesn’t care if its juniors live or not, so long as they work.

Until the Obama administration stepped in, that is. Who knows, the modern equivalents of Alice and Charlotte, the iconic, miserably compensated, junior readers in Stillman’s “The Last Days of Disco,” might be able to buy their own drinks in future …

]]>http://teleread.com/new-u-s-overtime-rules-threaten-big-publishing-hierarchydeference-culture/feed/4163087London Book Fair Excellence Awards showcase industriousness of an industrious industryhttp://teleread.com/london-book-fair-excellence-awards-showcase-industriousness-industrious-industry/
http://teleread.com/london-book-fair-excellence-awards-showcase-industriousness-industrious-industry/#respondThu, 16 Apr 2015 16:25:48 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=127548The London Book Fair has just issued a press release detailing its London Book Fair International Excellence Awards, given in association with The Publishers Association. And despite some very worthwhile and well-deserved commemorations, there was plenty of industry-focused industrious talking up of what an industrial industry publishing is in the UK. That’s In Da Dust Try, just in case the current government’s ears didn’t happen to catch the loud soundbites of the chief dignitaries. In fact, Jack Thomas, Director, The London Book Fair, said: “In the last few years, we have seen the rise and rise of international publishing and it is brilliant to see this celebrated at The London

]]>The London Book Fair has just issued a press release detailing its London Book Fair International Excellence Awards, given in association with The Publishers Association. And despite some very worthwhile and well-deserved commemorations, there was plenty of industry-focused industrious talking up of what an industrial industry publishing is in the UK. That’s In Da Dust Try, just in case the current government’s ears didn’t happen to catch the loud soundbites of the chief dignitaries.

In fact, Jack Thomas, Director, The London Book Fair, said: “In the last few years, we have seen the rise and rise of international publishing and it is brilliant to see this celebrated at The London Book Fair International Excellence Awards. Each one of our winners brings something special to the industry. We are proud to give them the recognition they deserve as they are the people and organisations who make publishing the significant, powerful global industry it is today.” Meanwhile, Richard Mollet, Chief Executive, The Publishers Association (UK), said: “It is great to see publishing innovation and excellence receive such international recognition. The sheer spread of countries whose publishing industries are recognised tonight demonstrates the continuing global relevance of our industry in the digital age.”

Not one word there about the cultural and intellectual importance of books, or their contribution to the development of civilization. Presumably the big hats were too busy oiling the wheels of industry (or the ears of politicians) to remember.

Fortunately, some of publishing’s representatives appear to have remembered the values that the industry leaders seem to have forgotten. “Judges identified Belgian publishers as some of the world’s most innovative in children’s and educational publishing,” with awards to Clavis Publishing and Uigeverij Van Inm, while “New York-based non-profit Library for All picked up The International Education Initiatives Award for their work helping people in developing countries ‘lift themselves out of poverty through education’.” Croatian publisher Fraktura, meanwhile, was honored for “a year of global success in which the leading literary publisher has brought writers from more than 40 countries to Croatian readers.”

The London Book Fair Lifetime Achievement Award this year went to Peter Usborne, founder and Managing Director of Usborne Books, who judging from his comments, hails from a time when publishing was about more than industriousness. “Publishing children’s books is an extension of fatherhood, and I wanted to go on being a father forever. But I never went into this job to earn serious money … I absolutely adore what I do, and so do most of the people who work here,” he said to the Financial Times. “They feel they are doing something worthwhile. My work is my hobby. It is an amazing privilege to run a children’s book publishing company.”

]]>http://teleread.com/london-book-fair-excellence-awards-showcase-industriousness-industrious-industry/feed/0127548Book Patrol proclaims undeath of the bookhttp://teleread.com/book-patrol-proclaims-undeath-of-the-book/
http://teleread.com/book-patrol-proclaims-undeath-of-the-book/#commentsWed, 25 Dec 2013 00:36:58 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=104053I’m not sure whether any of us pro-ebook pundits was actually expecting the death of the printed book, but it seems a lot of people thought we were. So much so that Book Patrol has decided it should proclaim that “The Worst is Over and The Book is not Dead.” Rumors of the rumors of the death of the book were greatly exaggerated, maybe. I’m sure the book’s relatives and family are breathing a sigh of relief outside the OR. So perhaps some people are jumping to correct a caricature impression here, but when it comes with such a funky infographic, who really cares? Now the death of the traditional publishing

]]>I’m not sure whether any of us pro-ebook pundits was actually expecting the death of the printed book, but it seems a lot of people thought we were. So much so that Book Patrol has decided it should proclaim that “The Worst is Over and The Book is not Dead.”

Rumors of the rumors of the death of the book were greatly exaggerated, maybe. I’m sure the book’s relatives and family are breathing a sigh of relief outside the OR.

So perhaps some people are jumping to correct a caricature impression here, but when it comes with such a funky infographic, who really cares? Now the death of the traditional publishing industry business model, that’s a different question. Walking dead hunt coming soon…

]]>http://teleread.com/book-patrol-proclaims-undeath-of-the-book/feed/4104053New Publisher House self-publishing report hardly fails to hypehttp://teleread.com/new-publisher-house-self-publishing-report-hardly-fails-to-hype/
http://teleread.com/new-publisher-house-self-publishing-report-hardly-fails-to-hype/#commentsSat, 28 Sep 2013 16:30:01 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=97530The new report from New Publisher House, State of Independence 2014, subtitled “The Self-Publishing Market: $52 Billion Game Changer,” talks about … well … self-publishing being a $52 billion game changer. Not hard to get your head round that one. And if you want to get the story in full, the opening section of the report is easily accessible just by entering your name and email here. “While the self-publishing movement is currently totally transforming the whole publishing industry, outdated methods of measuring and analysing the book publishing market have led to a vast underestimation of the size, power and growth of self-publishing,” the report declares. “The self-publishing book market

The new report from New Publisher House, State of Independence 2014, subtitled “The Self-Publishing Market: $52 Billion Game Changer,” talks about … well … self-publishing being a $52 billion game changer. Not hard to get your head round that one. And if you want to get the story in full, the opening section of the report is easily accessible just by entering your name and email here.

“While the self-publishing movement is currently totally transforming the whole publishing industry, outdated methods of measuring and analysing the book publishing market have led to a vast underestimation of the size, power and growth of self-publishing,” the report declares. “The self-publishing book market in the US currently represents over $52 billion in untapped revenue. This is twice the size of the established mainstream book publishing market’s total annual sales revenue.” Furthermore, “the number of aspiring self-published authors with completed manuscripts is more than 100 times the number of published authors.”

Tantalizingly, and unfortunately, the freely downloadable sample stops just short of the all-important information that tells you exactly how that jaw-dropping figure of $52 billion was arrived at. However, it’s also worth noting that New Publisher House “is about to revolutionize publishing” with a complete publishing system. “Stay tuned for upcoming crowdfunding campaign!” its website calls. If self-publishing really did release twice the value that the entire U.S. publishing industry has been able to create to date, well, I’d be pleasantly surprised. And as soon as I get more substantial figures to back up that claim, I’ll let you know. But don’t hold your breath.

]]>http://teleread.com/new-publisher-house-self-publishing-report-hardly-fails-to-hype/feed/397530Ebook Publisher Power Rankings: Who got the power?http://teleread.com/ebook-publisher-power-rankings-who-got-the-power/
http://teleread.com/ebook-publisher-power-rankings-who-got-the-power/#respondFri, 26 Jul 2013 19:42:43 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=92300The latest quarterly edition of the Digital Book World Ebook Publisher Power Rankings—one of those ratings league tables that corporates love—has appeared, with some welcome news for a couple of the industry’s biggest names—and some less welcome data for them on how well people with no money and corporate might behind them are doing at snarfing their lunch. “It’s a great feat for a publisher to have even one book make a best-seller list,” editorializes DBW’s Jeremy Greenfield, suggesting that DBW itself is keen to promote the value of its Power Rankings, which work by listing the publishers who have made the Digital Book World Ebook Best-Seller List in each quarter,

]]>The latest quarterly edition of the Digital Book World Ebook Publisher Power Rankings—one of those ratings league tables that corporates love—has appeared, with some welcome news for a couple of the industry’s biggest names—and some less welcome data for them on how well people with no money and corporate might behind them are doing at snarfing their lunch.

“It’s a great feat for a publisher to have even one book make a best-seller list,” editorializes DBW’s Jeremy Greenfield, suggesting that DBW itself is keen to promote the value of its Power Rankings, which work by listing the publishers who have made the Digital Book World Ebook Best-Seller List in each quarter, and the number of times they have appeared on that list.

By the Power Rankings, Hachette came out tops with 65 appearances and three number one bestsellers, followed by Penguin with 60 appearances and one bestseller, and Random House, with 59 appearances and six bestsellers. Obviously, the Penguin Random House joint entity, not yet reflected in those figures, is going to make a powerful Power Rankings showing in future quarters. Hachette’s strong showing, meanwhile, is no surprise in the light of recent statements by Hachette staffers such as Tim Hely Hutchinson in the UK.

Publishers are naturally keen to garner bragging rights from the likes of the Power Rankings, something which broader media coverage tends to encourage. Forbes‘ coverage of the Power Rankings, for instance—also by Jeremy Greenfield—is entitled “The Best Ebook Publishers of 2013 … so far.” But for me, the more interesting showing in the Power Rankings is the “Self-published” category. Self-published works appeared 44 times in the DBW Ebook Best-Seller List, and produced two number one bestsellers, coming in at fourth place behind the top three publishers already mentioned.

“Self-publishing is gaining momentum,” Greenfield concludes in his Forbes writeup. ” There were 22 appearances on the best-sellers list of self-published work in the first quarter. There were 44 in the second quarter.” And in the DBW Power Rankings coverage itself, he states:

“It was a surprise that self-published titles were No. 4 on this list last quarter. The repeat here is likely no fluke, especially considering there were more self-published best-sellers in the second quarter than in the first — double, in fact.”

Is it really such a surprise? I’ll admit that at times I’ve written in favor of corporate-backed e-publishing versus go-it-alone, but the stats seem to argue otherwise. Obviously all that excitement about self-publishing can’t be entirely down to cultish enthusiasm and me-tooism, then. And despite the efforts of DBW and its people to promote the value of the Power Rankings, with all the ancillary benefits of publisher advertising and sponsorship, subscriptions to the parent publication, delegate sales at the Digital Book World Conference, etc., etc., the figures themselves can’t be ignored.

Even if the biggest publishers are fast learning to play the e-book game, and get solid results and better profits out of it, they are still doing nowhere near as well in publishing e-books as their market cap and huge teams would lead you to expect.

Seems a lot of the power still does lie with the little people, no matter how much DBW and others prefer to focus on the big names.

]]>http://teleread.com/ebook-publisher-power-rankings-who-got-the-power/feed/092300Victoria Barnsley’s HarperCollins exit and the content conundrumhttp://teleread.com/victoria-barnsleys-harpercollins-exit-and-the-content-conundrum/
http://teleread.com/victoria-barnsleys-harpercollins-exit-and-the-content-conundrum/#respondSat, 06 Jul 2013 18:05:05 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=89326Victoria Barnsley, Chief Executive and Publisher at HarperCollins UK since 2000, announced her unexpected exit earlier this week. According to the report in the UK’s The Bookseller, expanded on the circumstances and on her own view of her profession in a valedictory speech at the annual HarperCollins author party, held this year in the Orangery of Kensington Palace. (My thanks to author and illustrator David O’Connell for his picture of the party.) In this, she called for her peers to keep their focus on publishing as a content business, not a media business. As quoted by The Bookseller, Barnsley said: “My advice to publishers, and I think on this occasion

According to the report in the UK’s The Bookseller, expanded on the circumstances and on her own view of her profession in a valedictory speech at the annual HarperCollins author party, held this year in the Orangery of Kensington Palace. (My thanks to author and illustrator David O’Connell for his picture of the party.)

In this, she called for her peers to keep their focus on publishing as a content business, not a media business.

As quoted by The Bookseller, Barnsley said:

“My advice to publishers, and I think on this occasion I’m probably allowed to give a little piece of advice, is by all means play with tech companies, but please please don’t try and become one. Remember where your true strength lies—we are content businesses.”

Now, I have a problem with that. Notwithstanding Barnsley’s many years in the business and the respect due to her decision. Several problems, in fact.

To deal with the straightforward industry questions first:

I consider publishing a distribution and marketing business at least as much as it is a content business, if not more. The ones actually in the business of producing the content, who get paid directly for content, are the authors.

Yes, that ignores a whole sub-ecosystem of non-books, series titles, spinoffs, and other marketing-driven product where the publisher is the instigator for its own business reasons, but even those anonymous apologies for books need writers. Publishers need the content as window-dressing for their nakedly commercial operations and to make them feel better about themselves, that’s all; like Renaissance petty tyrants commissioning artists and poets to exonerate them through art.

The tech companies that Barnsley cites actually proved that the content doesn’t need publishers. It can go straight to the consumer without them. They have transformed writing. Self-publishing has led more people to write and circulate, and even actually market and sell, their writing than ever before, without visible aid from publishers.

Blogging has become a semi-respectable literary form, at least on a level with the 19th-century feuilleton. Kindle Direct Publishing threatens wholesale to eat the publishers’ publisher’s lunch. They, meanwhile, fought tooth and nail to keep writers and readers under the same old limits and restrictions.

Above all, though, it distresses me to hear a leading publisher describe their business as a content business. To my mind, that’s practically a self-condemnation. Why? Because that word ‘content’ for me reduces the contents of books to mere data, filling, so many DPI or bytes without any intrinsic worth or capability to transmit ideas, embody culture, change minds, or become part of our feelings and thoughts.

“Information and experiences that may provide value for an end-user/audience in specific contexts.”

The word is purely what’s in the container as seen from the container’s POV. It disparages content from the start. It gives me no reassurance whatsoever that that publisher actually knows, or cares, about what is inside a book, let alone what distinguishes a good one from a bad one, or makes one or other worth producing.

The HarperCollins authors’ party 2013, courtesy of David O’Connell.

Everywhere, thanks to Bill Gates, you can hear the cliche: “Content is King.” I’m not content with this content cant. Would you describe what’s inside your head as just content?

If you subscribe to much modern cognitive science and philosophy, words, language, writing, are what make us self-conscious, self-aware. Words are the machine language of the human soul. Language itself is the root or embodiment of human being. Words, literally, speak us. They create us, as rational beings and individual personalities. Can you imagine content doing that?

You don’t have to sign up to those particular and much-contested theories to see the value of what lies inside books, though. “That so many writers have been prepared to accept a kind of martyrdom is the best tribute that flesh can pay to the living spirit of man as expressed in his literature,” wrote Anthony Burgess. Can you imagine martyring yourself for content? “The living spirit of man as expressed in his content”? The tongue shrinks from even saying it.

All human self-awareness, consciousness, thought, feeling, will, and action, down there under NAICS Code 71? I don’t think so somehow. And that helps me understand why so many writers and thinkers now stand on the tech side of the fence, over against HarperCollins and the other content pumpers.

]]>http://teleread.com/victoria-barnsleys-harpercollins-exit-and-the-content-conundrum/feed/089326Frankfurt Book Fair survey finds media sector in state of runny fluxhttp://teleread.com/frankfurt-book-fair-survey-finds-media-sector-in-state-of-runny-flux/
http://teleread.com/frankfurt-book-fair-survey-finds-media-sector-in-state-of-runny-flux/#respondFri, 05 Jul 2013 17:45:07 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=89201A just-released survey of media industry opinion, conducted under the auspices of the Frankfurt Book Fair in the long lead-up to the European publishing industry’s number one event in October, finds the media sector caught on the cusp between past and future, and highly uncertain about which way things will go. Carried out by Frankfurt StoryDrive (an initiative that “bursts the boundaries between narrative worlds”) and newthinking communications GmbH, the “Market Climate Survey on the Future of the Content and Media World” polled 1,400 media pros, asking them broadly: “What will the [media] world look like in 10 years ?” The resulting survey is available as a PDF here. “The industry

]]>A just-released survey of media industry opinion, conducted under the auspices of the Frankfurt Book Fair in the long lead-up to the European publishing industry’s number one event in October, finds the media sector caught on the cusp between past and future, and highly uncertain about which way things will go.

Carried out by Frankfurt StoryDrive (an initiative that “bursts the boundaries between narrative worlds”) and newthinking communications GmbH, the “Market Climate Survey on the Future of the Content and Media World” polled 1,400 media pros, asking them broadly: “What will the [media] world look like in 10 years ?”

“The industry is caught in a constant balancing act—between back and forth, today and tomorrow, tradition and innovation,” declared Frankfurt StoryDrive. “It follows logically that the results of the study reveal a sense of indecision.”

The full survey consisted of seven scenarios for the possible future of the media sector, worked up from 22 video statements “from innovators in the media and content industries … trend scouts , publishers , authors , film producers and games developers.” (Scroll down to view one of the video statements; the remainder are unfortunately only available in German. —Ed.)

In summary, these were:

In 2022, you’ll have access to everything at the swipe of a finger

The virtual world will permeate all aspects of life in 2022

In the future, stories will be independent and fluid

Stories will be highly individualized in 2022

New working relationships will define the media market in 2022

The year 2022 will be dominated by cooperation

In the future, media companies will rely on new core activities

These scenarios were then put to “around 1,400 representatives of the international content and media world—ranging from the managing director of a large book publisher to a librarian.”

They were very unhappy with the virtual world scenario, with close on 80 percent rejecting or cautiously monitoring its development; and not overly receptive to the principle that consumers should be active in the formulation of stories, with only around 20 percent concurring with this.

As for personalized stories, 81 percent were against adapting “the content of a story to the specific circumstances of individual readers;” and 73 percent declared themselves “not yet prepared for a future of complex products with shorter life cycles;” while 66 percent were “reluctant to embrace consumers as business partners;” and only 17 percent were “preparing to use crowdfunding” to support development.

All in all, then, a pretty conservative response to some admittedly challenging proposals, which tends to confirm received opinion about the media business.

“Unfortunately, new technologies are still all too often seen as a threat, rather than as an opportunity,” said Frankfurt StoryDrive’s Britta Friedrich, co-author of the study. “Many of those surveyed expressed a clear tendency toward maintaining the status quo and, along with that, the hope that they won’t be affected by these changes.”

Seems that even in 2013, Big Media still sees technological change as something to be kept at arm’s length rather than embraced, and is absolutely not ready to go cheek to cheek with it. At this rate the Apples and Googles of the world, present and future, can look forward to more untrammeled disruptive innovation, with the media pros only moving, as so often before, to engage with them when it’s already too late.

]]>http://teleread.com/frankfurt-book-fair-survey-finds-media-sector-in-state-of-runny-flux/feed/089201Penguin Random House email turns on the schmaltz for agentshttp://teleread.com/penguin-random-house-turns-on-the-schmaltz-for-its-agents/
http://teleread.com/penguin-random-house-turns-on-the-schmaltz-for-its-agents/#respondTue, 02 Jul 2013 15:47:33 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=88741A kindly correspondent shared with me an email signed by Markus Dohle, CEO of the newly-merged Penguin Random House, that has been circulated to the new mega-publisher’s agents—in the same spirit as Bertelsmann’s welcoming website banner pictured above. Here is the full text for your edification: To Our Literary Agents, Today, I am proud to write to you from the officially united Penguin Random House. Over the past few months, we have been working through the many financial, legal, and logistical arrangements necessary for the merger to become a reality. But despite the tasks already accomplished, we are really still just at the starting line when it comes to building

A kindly correspondent shared with me an email signed by Markus Dohle, CEO of the newly-merged Penguin Random House, that has been circulated to the new mega-publisher’s agents—in the same spirit as Bertelsmann’s welcoming website banner pictured above.

Here is the full text for your edification:

To Our Literary Agents,

Today, I am proud to write to you from the officially united Penguin Random House.

Over the past few months, we have been working through the many financial, legal, and logistical arrangements necessary for the merger to become a reality. But despite the tasks already accomplished, we are really still just at the starting line when it comes to building our new company. The process of creating a unified Penguin Random House platform of systems and operations will be gradual, providing plenty of time for us to learn and evaluate from all sides of our company the best ways to bring together our programs, resources, skills, talents, and ideas in order to best serve authors, booksellers, readers, and all of our marketplace partners.

I realize that you are eager to understand how our merger will affect you and your clients. The answer is that we will continue to work with you together just as we have separately. Our publishers will continue to be encouraged to publish in the independently entrepreneurial way they always have. You and your clients will continue to benefit from an extraordinary breadth of publishing choices, editorial talents, and experience. Our publishing leadership remains endowed with tremendous autonomy and financial resources to decide which books to publish, and how to publish them. We expect this to continue in our new business, as we seek new books from both the established and the debut authors you represent.

I am sure that, over time, as we learn from each other, and continue to invest in our print and digital publishing, marketing, sales, and distribution programs, there will be changes for us to consider and to discuss with you and our other partners. That is, however, for the future.

Today, I thank you for your many and ongoing contributions to our success. Your authors and their books have been, and will remain, at the heart of everything we do.

]]>http://teleread.com/penguin-random-house-turns-on-the-schmaltz-for-its-agents/feed/088741The Problem with Children’s Books: A Parent’s Perspectivehttp://teleread.com/the-problem-with-childrens-books-a-parents-perspective/
http://teleread.com/the-problem-with-childrens-books-a-parents-perspective/#respondTue, 26 Feb 2013 19:04:10 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=80034We recently had our Family Day long weekend, and the Beloved and I spent some of it at the home of his sister. She’s the mother of a toddler and a newborn, and while we were visiting, the subject of books came up. I enjoyed having the opportunity to pick the brain of a parent on this particular subject. (What did this mom think were the biggest mistakes children’s book publishers are making? What does she look for when she shops for her kids?) Some of her comments surprised me. 1. Children’s Book Advertising Why aren’t they doing this? That was her biggest question. When her toddler watches the occasional

]]>We recently had our Family Day long weekend, and the Beloved and I spent some of it at the home of his sister. She’s the mother of a toddler and a newborn, and while we were visiting, the subject of books came up. I enjoyed having the opportunity to pick the brain of a parent on this particular subject. (What did this mom think were the biggest mistakes children’s book publishers are making? What does she look for when she shops for her kids?)

Some of her comments surprised me.

1. Children’s Book Advertising

Why aren’t they doing this? That was her biggest question. When her toddler watches the occasional DVR’ed kids show, there are tons of ads—some geared to kids (toys, food products), and some geared to parents (stores, health items and so on).

Why are there no commercials for books? She’s never seen one. Of course, her child does ask for things he sees on television. Maybe books would be more successful, she surmised, if they were advertised the same way as other products made for children.

2. Special Promotions

Why aren’t they doing this, either? Another troubling lack she pointed out to me was sloppy marketing. She just picked up Alligator Pie to read with her two-year-old, and it was a special anniversary edition re-issue. Why didn’t the bookstore have a display for this? Why weren’t they trumpeting this special release?

Books are a kid purchase more often initiated by parents. Shouldn’t a nostalgia purchase—a special re-issue of a book the parent might have enjoyed as a child themselves—be heavily pushed at them?

3. Parent Power

I touched upon this above from a marketing standpoint, but it bears repeating on the content front as well: The younger the child, the more likely it is that the book was chosen and purchased by a parent. So the content needs to move beyond television tie-in stuff.

The Beloved’s sister admits she doesn’t buy as many books for her kids as maybe she should, but she also complains that much of the ‘modern’ content is simply unappealing to her. “The old stuff, the stuff we read when we were kids, is better,” she told me. Maybe the publishers are happy to just keep collecting a royalty for Alligator Pie until the end of time; it’s not for me to say. But it’s clear that the media tie-in content doesn’t speak to every parent.

4. The Power of Book Discovery

As a teacher, I have access to different discovery channels than she does, and I do know that there are books—good ones—still being published which are not just media tie-ins. But obviously, this news isn’t reaching regular parents like her.

Aside from her own childhood favorites, she may occasionally buy her son a book he especially enjoyed at his preschool program. But beyond that, she simply didn’t know there was anything else out there. She had dismissed modern children’s book publishing as nothing but a sales engine for Disney and Thomas the Tank Engine.

How can publishers of quality stuff reach people like her? Goodreads? Amazon? Is this an area where in-store retail might still have a foothold?

I don’t know the answers to some of these questions. And it may well be the case that there are several good answers for different types of customers. But I do think it’s clear that there is a promotion gap, and perhaps an information gap, too. There’s certainly room for improvement.

Customers are willing to spend in the children’s book category. Indeed, the primary feeling she has about children’s books is guilt—guilt that maybe she isn’t reading to them enough.

A smart publisher—a smart marketer—can sell to a customer like that! So … why aren’t they?

]]>http://teleread.com/the-problem-with-childrens-books-a-parents-perspective/feed/080034A Radical Proposal: Let’s Make Books Fun Again!http://teleread.com/a-radical-proposal-lets-make-books-fun-again/
http://teleread.com/a-radical-proposal-lets-make-books-fun-again/#respondFri, 22 Feb 2013 15:00:28 +0000http://www.teleread.com/?p=79586I read a lot of news stories as part of my work for TeleRead, and lately, I’ve noticed that many are dominated by a decidedly gloomy tone. Apple gets sued. Readers get sued. All five of the big publishers get sued. Then there are the copyright squabbles, the fair use disputes, author’s rights, reader’s rights, corporate overlord rights … it just goes on and on. And it’s all terribly complicated and difficult and cumbersome, and … well, pointless, really. This is an industry that’s under threat from a million competing forms of entertainment, 95 percent of which can be accessed off the same device as the book, and this is how

]]>I read a lot of news stories as part of my work for TeleRead, and lately, I’ve noticed that many are dominated by a decidedly gloomy tone. Apple gets sued. Readers get sued. All five of the big publishers get sued. Then there are the copyright squabbles, the fair use disputes, author’s rights, reader’s rights, corporate overlord rights … it just goes on and on. And it’s all terribly complicated and difficult and cumbersome, and … well, pointless, really.

This is an industry that’s under threat from a million competing forms of entertainment, 95 percent of which can be accessed off the same device as the book, and this is how we’re going to solve the problem?

Books can be very serious works of art, sure. But they’re designed to be entertainment, too. Why can’t it be fun again? Are we really going to lure the next generation of readers—who spend more time with their tablets than with their televisions—away from the Angry Birds and Netflix apps with doom and gloom and restriction and a scaling back of what we can do, instead of an opening up of it?